May 16, 2008

He's trying to make us think that the flag pin gets on the lapel one day because someone happens to hand him one, so he pops it on, and then the next day, he puts on a different suit, so it's not there, so he leaves it. Like he just doesn't really think about it one way or the other. Come on! He's lying! Don't lie! I mean, I know you've been having an unimaginably powerful experience with millions of people buying the things you say, but don't get cocky. We do still have our lie detectors, and we can reactivate them if we get in the mood to. Don't push us. Keep the magic alive.

100 comments:

This week, after eschewing the patriotic symbol for quite some time, Obama started wearing the pin to selected events. On Tuesday, he was sans pin on the Senate floor, but then later donned it while speaking to working-class voters in Missouri during the evening.

Obama needs to understand that people notice and lying damages his brand. The best example of the quote above was on somebodies blog, not the MSM, which again demonstrates the power of blogs.

It showed Obama coming down the steps of the Capitol, charcoal suit, blue tie, sans flag, flying off to Missouri. Then a side by side shot of Obama, charcoal suit, blue tie, big flag pin.

another Elitest one minute, Messiah preachin to the bitter flag clingers the next, moment.

Obama has a patriotism problem. So far we have seen a lot of evidence from his wife, from his 20 year spiritual mentor, from his prior refusal to wear the pin or hold his hand over his heart, from his immigrant father, from his lack of service in the military, from his attitude in his books...that he is skeptical of American exceptionalism.

This ought to be a trivial issue. I emphasize "ought" because the other day, when it came out Obama has slipped a flag pin on for an event in Cape Girardeau, MO (practically my home town), my immediate gut response was "that manipulative bastard".

I arguably feel worse about him now, knowing he wears the pin to fool us rural rubes, than I did when he just didn't wear it altogether.

But really, all he did was say some things that didn't jibe with what he knew to be the case.

I don't really believe that he ever leaves a pin on his suit instead of taking it off at the end of the day. Whether this is one of the more important issues in this presidential race is another question.

It's like a tape recorder. When you say a new thing over the old thing, the old thing is automatically erased. Sort of. Almost completely. Nearly un- unrecoverable-ly. What's so hard to understand about that? You're expected to just forget about him telling us lapel pins of flags are hollow emblems of of ersatz patriotism signifying nothing, and making an intellectual point about it. That's gone now. Broader audience, refined message. Cello! I mean, Voilà!

ANN;Your judgment seems blinded by the fact that he's bright.In spite of ample evidence, you refuse to recognize that Barack Obama lies, bends the truth, and is an accomplished phony.He and "slick Willie", the disbarred lawyer, have too much in common.

Whether this is one of the more important issues in this presidential race is another question.

It's not important by itself. However, it is an example among many other examples regarding the same subject.

When Obama goes into talk to the Iranian President, we have to be confident that Obama believes that America is better than Iran in all areas. If he doesn't, he is more likely to give away things that the rest of the country values more than him. That would be a bad result.

“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest. Instead I’m going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.”

Call me a cynic, but I always interpolated that to mean that because American flag lapel pins don't play well with his leftist core constituency he would not be wearing it during the primaries, but if and when he was running in the general election he'd be wearing it.

But then along came Rev Wright, the Bill Ayers issue, and his own wife Michelle's comments, and Obama found himself hemmoraging badly on the patriotism front. So now he wears it. Anything else at play here?

The flag pin issue is a minor gotcha-type moment. Having had to explain not wearing it anymore, Obama should have toughed it out and not worn it anymore. Instead, worried by his poll numbers with Jacksonian voters (working-class whites who are gun rights supporters), he decided to start pandering.

This is similar to George H.W. Bush's Read my lips, no new taxes pledge. Once he broke it, he was seen as being prone to being manipulated, and it hurt him. Obama is in the same scenario now.

SGT Ted and Roger will show up soon, so I'll make a slightly off topic remark.

I've never worn a flag pin on my label, but I think that the boldest understatement are the guys who wear their little CIB miniature

http://militaryvetspx.com/coindrmiba.html

- For the unwashed :), the Combat Infantryman's Badge is just that. It is the ultimate demonstration that "I was at the pointy tip of the spear once". Roger and I coming from Armor are on one hand forever jealous of that little blue badge (because Armor soldiers don't have anyting like it) and on the other, you couldn't pay me enough to do that job.

- anyway, I've considered doing the second best thing, and wearing a BSM miniature, but I'm not quite vain enough :)

http://militaryvetspx.com/brstlapin1.html

The Bronze Star Lapel Pin is worn on civilian clothes and represents the full size medal award. By tradition military veterans can show their service to the country by wearing the highest ranking military award they received on the lapel of their suit or sport coat.

I utterly distrust the man of whom it is continually said: 'Oh, he's a good-enough fellow, but, of course, in politics—he plays politics.' If he does that you can't afford to trust him It is about as bad for a man to profess, and for those that listen to him by their plaudits to insist upon his pro¬fessing, something to which they know he cannot live up, as it is for him to go below what he ought to to, because, if he gets into the intolerable habit of lying to him¬self and to his audience as to what he in¬tends to do, it is absolutely certain he won't be able then to start up to what he knows ought to be done.

The temptation of the average politician is to promise everything to the reformers and then to do everything for the organization. I think I can say that whatever I have promised on the stump or off the stump, either promised expressly or impliedly, to either organization or reformers, I have kept the promise, and I should keep it just as much if the reformers dis¬approved as if the organization disapproved, and vice versa.

I wish I could warn all my countrymen against that most degrading of processes— the process of deification of any man for what we are pleased to term smartness; the deification of mere intellectual acuteness, wholly unaccompanied by moral responsibility, wholly without reference to whether it is exercised in accordance or not in accordance with the elementary rules of morality.

If there is one thing which I should like to eradicate from the character of any American, it is the dreadful practice of paying a certain mean admiration and homage to the man who, whether in business or in polities, achieves success at the cost of sacrificing all those principles for the lack of which in the eye of any righteous man no possible achievement of success can in any way compensate.

I was awarded the CIB, and I am very proud that I got the award. When I wear a suit coat, I wear my 173d pin with the attached wings. Except for you veterans, I'll bet nobody has any idea what I'm talking about. Has anyone seen Obama in his pickup game of basketball wearing a USMC tee shirt? What's up with that?

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it."

Or how about Washington?

"I do not mean to exclude altogether the idea of patriotism. I know it exists, and I know it has done much in the present contest. But I will venture to assert, that a great and lasting war can never be supported on this principle alone. It must be aided by a prospect of interest, or some reward."

Maybe Teddy Roosevelt?

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

I have a pin! A Sergio Bustamante pretty much permanently attached to my favorite jacket. Bustamonte is the guy who has a workshop in Guadalajara that fashions large strange ceramic statues of creatures with stacked sets of eyes generally derived from native Mexican myths. The pin depicts a little boy riding on a star like a comet. It's the cutest little thing ever. I wear it boldly un-self-conscienciously like a brooch. The jacket is black cashmere. The pin livens right up a funeral or any other somber event. Children go straight for it. So do grown men. Oddly though, women never touch it. Which is a real shame because once they feel the jacket, they're mine. It's just that irresistible. But no flag. Like Obama, I find flag lapel pins hollow emblems of patriotism. They gave my brothers and me each a flag pin at my father's funeral, it being a straight-up military funeral and all. I passed mine on directly to one of my sisters who was happy to take it. They all know my attitude regarding such empty symbols. They're like bumper stickers. I wouldn't mar a car with one. Even though my mother designed one, "Love your country? Thank a vet." I do love this country. More than any pin or bumper sticker can convey, and I'd rather a silly cheerful and very unmasculine brooch than a constant physical reminder of my fathers death. But then I'm not running for POUS. Obama should have stuck with his original stated position. He'd at least get credit for taking a position that makes a kind of sense and resonates at least with some of us.

I'd go with the CIB, only a few of us recognize the 173rd crest and know that it implies that you served in Vietnam.

Why Armor? cuz I was walking along a dusty road out between Eagle and Khe Sanh, and a platoon of M48 tanks went by, bringing up that choking red dust. The tanks had ice chests, lawn chairs strapped on the rack. One had a beach umbrella. I decided at that point, that armor was the civilized way to fight. :)

What does that even mean? Is this really how you view international relations? Good guys and bad guys, better or worse? No wonder we're up to our necks in Iraq.

If you thought your car was worth $10,000, you wouldn't want someone who only thought it was worth $5000 to sell it for you. They are likely to get less money.

If the Presdent values "Americanism" less than the average American, they are likely to give up more in a negotiation than the average American would. One great example is the International Criminal Court. Obama signing such an agreement would show that he values our insitutions less than an international one. Is this what we want in a President?

While it is a minor flap, both the vacillation, and the lengths gone to justify it, are mildly interesting, as are the venues selected for the wearing of it. One could add this to the list of examples of condescension for working class voters on the part of a parochial liberal elitist. As this most recent instance demonstrates, wearing that lapel pin was a planned decision just as taking it off later was a self-conscious act. Thus far, Obama has been successful at fooling most of the people most of the time and the odds continue to favor him doing so.

He's trying to make us think that the flag pin gets on the lapel one day because someone happens to hand him one, so he pops it on, and then the next day, he puts on a different suit, so it's not there, so he leaves it.

Obviously, it's his staff's fault. They notice he's about to descend and speak unto the hoi-polloi, so they pin a pin to his lapel. He may still believe it's a "substitute for true patriotism" rather than an expression of genuine amor patriae -- he can think whatever he likes -- but his staff are responsible for getting him the Presidency. That's what they're paid to do. And they're doing their job.

I'll admit I don't know much about the International Criminal Court, but I think that a willingness to submit ourselves to a set of standards we would expect other nations to also abide by is one that my "average American" might not find so noxious. A distaste for "exceptionalism" is part of my definition of "Americanism."

This is a follow-up to Zeb Quinn's comment. I would no more base my opinion of a person's patriotism on his choice of lapel jewelry than I would on his choice of cuff-links. However, if a man stated that he refused to wear cuff links because only faggots wore cuff links, I would conclude that he is homophobic. Obama's dismissal of flag wearers as jingoists is the true statement of his patriotism and his tolerance.

You are right Drill SGT. Powell gets it. When sandbagged by the French February 2003, after listening to the long history lessons from the other participants of the UN Security Council, the Secretary of State bristled and said, "While we may be a relatively young country, we are the oldest democracy assemble here around this table."

Trevor Jackson, The USA has nothing to apologize for. We are and continue to be the authors of human dignity. There is no nation that can stand in moral judgement of the USA. If Obama doesn't believe this, he is disqualified to be President.

But then, I'm big on the mystery of service patches. Just checked out and read Trevor Paglin's I Could Tell You But Then You Would Have to be Destroyed by Me: Emblems from the Pentagon's Black World, a wonderful little book on service patches. The cover of the book is a real patch. Nice little gimmick there. Saved $15.60 by not actually buying the book. *buffs nails on shirt*

This is entirely a mess of Obama's making. I don't care that, at least for a while, he chose not to wear the flag - his choice and there are lots of ways to be patriotic - but he had to make a big deal about why he didn't wear it, giving us rubes a teachable moment on his sophisticated version of patriotism. Fine - he took a principled stand - maybe one I don't agree with, but I still respect people who take stands, especially potentially unpopular ones as it can indicate some courage.

Now, however, he has a patriotism problem, so on goes the flag. He just proved that he's full of BS - either his earlier statements were a lie, or else he is only using it for camoflage now.

A lot of people like to quote the say that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" to mean that anyone being (or trying to appear to be) patriotic must a scoundrel, but that's not what it means. What it means is that a scoundrel will hide behind false patriotism when all his other dodges have failed, which is exactly what Obama is doing with his use of the flag pin in only carefully selected venues.

William Henry Harrison wore a miniature canoe in his lapel to play off of his slogan to vote for Tippecanoe and Tyler too. The canoe commemorated his victory over the Indians at the battle of Tippecanoe. He was one of the oldest presidents who was elected at the age of 68.

John McCain also wears Canoe. But that’s only because his supply of High Karate ran out in 1986.

If I tell some ugly person that they look nice today, I've lied but I've likely made them happy. Lying about a pin on ones lapel to appease the "love it or leave it" crowd is a similar parry. Republican use patriotism to bludgeon their enemies with. Most tyrannical leaders, like Bush and fascist governments do the same thing. The more he lies about a fucking pin, the more I like him.

You can call Obama's father a lot of things, but immigrant isn't one of them. There's not the slightest indication he ever intended to build a life in the US (had he not left them already, I'm sure that he would have expected American wife and child to follow him back to Kenya).

William Howard Taft never wore a flag pin. He did favor gravy stained cravats which proclaimed his allegiance to a well roast beef au jus as opposed to the new fangled Philly cheese steak which was all the rage.

A distaste for "exceptionalism" is part of my definition of "Americanism."

This is why you have no problem with Obama. In your mind (and Obama's, America is nothing special, its just another country. Therefore, changing it to be something else doesn't make much of a difference.

I tend to differ. America is exceptional. We shouldn't allow that to be taken away.

Thomas Jefferson did not wear a flag pin. He was also the first president to eschew wearing a powdered wig at formal state functions. He did have an unfortunate problem as his ginger colored hair had begun to thin at an alarming rate in his second term. Luckily his girlfriend Sally was not only a lusty wench but a very inventive soul. She invented the weave which has been handed down from generation to generation as a crucial tool to rap stars and clerks at the Old Navy.

If I tell some ugly person that they look nice today, I've lied but I've likely made them happy. Lying about a pin on ones lapel to appease the "love it or leave it" crowd is a similar parry

No it isn't unless you are telling the person they look nice so you can f@ck them or sell them a junker used car. Merely making a not so sincere complement to avoid hurting feelings is NOT the same thing as subterfuge and deceit so you can get what you want.

President James Garfield did not wear a flag lapel pin. He did wear an interesting tie clasp which was two interlocking twists of gold that formed a shape very reiminscent of a side by side representations of the Labia Majora. It was widely rumored that his wife Lucretia Rudolph Garfield had been born with the unusual characteristic of two vaginas. He had originally met her at the bachelor party of Chang and Eng thrown by P.T. Barnum in New York City. President Garfield never explicitly explained the meaning of this strange symbol that has continued to be in use today most recently as the “name” of a diminutive rock and roll performer from Minnesota. It was a secret that he took to his grave after he was assassinated by a disappointed orifice seeker on July 2, 1881.

Trumpit, you know that tyrants generally lock up or execute people like you who criticize them. Can I then assume that you're hiding out somewhere with the rest of the dissident population?

The problem with people like you who toss out tyrant, dictator and fascist epithets is you insult people who truly live under those kinds of governments. That's rather pathetic actually. Its a lot like a millionarie saying he knows what its like to be poor because his hotel doesn't have room service.

Obama's magic is so far gone, most people forget he had it. Would he look Ahmadinijad in the eye and say, "Let me tell you why we hate you."? Only someone with the Reaganesque cajones should be talking to adversaries.

I don't think its a lie at all. After 9/11, someone gave me a flag pin and I put it on one of my coats. That was the only flag pin I ever had, and I never took it off that coat. So people see me wearing a flag pin about twice a year, since I don't wear that coat that often. I'm not making any kind of statement. Just too lazy to take it off.

I'm sure since the flag pin controversy, people have probably tried to "test" Obama by offering him a flag pin. So he probably just puts it on if it's handed to him.

I don't think he's lying at all and it's awfully presumptuous for you to say that with absolutely no facts to back you up.

Martin Van Buren did not wear a flag lapel pin. However he did earn the distinction of being the first minority president. Being of Dutch extraction he was the first President who was not a descendant of the peoples of the British Isles. Many of his opponents claimed he had an unfair advantage as over 90% of the Dutch voters were in his corner because of racial pride. President Van Buren was very proud of his Dutch heritage but had some controversy because of his minister in the Dutch Reformed church who often preached sermons that demonized the English as pasty faced oppressors from perfidious Albion. He survived this controversy but was eventually undone by the scandal of having been caught inserting his finger in Harriet Beecher Stowe.

I haven't said this. There's a difference between believing America is exceptional (in the sense of possessing a unique and special quality worth fighting to protect) and believing that that quality allows for a my-way-or-the-highway exceptionalism.

Sloan, you still haven't answered my question: What sort of evidence are you looking for from Obama to demonstrate his love for America?

I'll admit I don't know much about the International Criminal Court, but I think that a willingness to submit ourselves to a set of standards we would expect other nations to also abide by is one that my "average American" might not find so noxious.

Actually I think subordinating my American constitutional rights to an international court of law is quite noxious. If an American serviceman is accused of a crime, we have a defined legal process within the USMCJ to deal with it.

If the rest of the international community wishes to subordinate their citizenry to the whims of unelected officials from foreign nations, by all means go for it.

When I was a kid my mom told me that just because all my friends decided to jump off a roof to prove they can fly doesn't mean you have to follow them to prove your an idiot also.

Millard Fillmore did not wear a flag lapel pin. Strangely enough he also did not wear a Whig which is funny since he was the last member of the Whig party to serve as President. He was the second vice president to succeed to the presidency after the death of the president and was deprived of the chance for reelection because of various controversies during his administration. He lived until after the Civil War and was famous for his last words: "my only regret in death is that the Whig dies with me." Which was also the last words of Liberace. Some peoplehave an overinflated opinion of themselves.

Teddy Roosevelt did not wear a flag lapel pin. However he did popularize the wearing of pince-nez glasses which are basically eyeglasses that are supported by pinching the nose and which do not have earpieces. However a little know fact is that President Roosevelt was required to wear a pince-nez device on his testicles as they were extremely large and caused him difficulty in locomotion if he did not pinch them together in a compact space. Fortunately it will not be a problem for our current presidential candidates as their testicle have been atrophied by either age or a shrewish wife. (With the possible exception of Mrs. Clinton.)

Didn't you mean to say "vermin". I know what pseudo-existence you profess to live, and I find it despicable. Bush was one of the worst presidents in U.S. history, guilty of tyranny, fascism and much worse. Many true blue Republicans like Bruce Fein said that he should have been impeached for abusing his office. Why do you support such evil people? I think I know the answer: you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

"Actually I think subordinating my American constitutional rights to an international court of law is quite noxious."

Who's talking about "subordinating"? Wouldn't we have just as much say in determining the rules we would agree to follow? And if they don't go beyond the terms already established by our own guidelines, what do we have to fear?

Except, of course, if we refuse to apply our own standard of justice to ourselves. Wouldn't a willingness to be held accountable to our own standards reduce animosity toward the U.S.?

Wouldn't a willingness to be held accountable to our own standards reduce animosity toward the U.S.?

Every day, in thousands of courtrooms across this nation, we willingly do exactly that, and have done so, at almost any given point in time of our existence, to a degree unthinkable in almost every other nation on earth, but that has done little, if anything, to reduce latent or blatant animosities. You are extremely naive, I think.

James Madison did not wear a flag lapel pin. However he did institute innovations in several practices that have continued to this day. He first posted his opinions under a pseudonym when he was supporting the Constitution in a group of famous essays that have become know as the Federalist Papers. This practice continues to this very day in the posting of comments on the internets. His wife Dolly was even more of a innovator She popularized the wearing of low cut ball gowns that displayed a vast expanse of décolletage as well as the wearing of turbans when she did not feel like washing her hair.But her greatest contribution was in popularizing the practice of fellatio which was how she snagged James Madison as husband. It was originally known as a blow gift but the incessant demands for it from the diminutive chief executive led to it being termed a “blow job” to this very day. Although most right thinking people consider it a very, very nice gift.

"Wouldn't we have just as much say in determining the rules we would agree to follow? And if they don't go beyond the terms already established by our own guidelines, what do we have to fear?"

But we don't have enough say in the determination of the rules for the ICC. At least not enough to protect important institutions of American justice like double jeopardy. See for a long time I was in favor of the US signing onto the ICC, but then I did some research and realized that the way the process is set up, the defense and the prosecution can appeal the ruling.

I have no problem with a US soldier who commits a crime abroad being tried by an international court in a fair and just manner. But I do object to the possibility of an innocent soldier who is acquitted being forced to endure appeal after appeal because the prosecutor has some anti-American bias and the system permits him or her to be continually harassed about the matter after a jury has found him or her innocent. That's not right, and since the UN is apparently set up in a manner that doesn't allow us enough influence to change that provision, we're right to have no part of it.

And you're arguing in bad faith. I'm speaking of a set of international standards authored by us and other nations, not just our own, as you describe. Trying to find ways in which we can be better neighbors to other countries is easily labeled naive by the fearful or brave by those confident in our principles.

The point is not whether we're willing to join the ICC anyway. The point is that there's a number of ways to prove you love your country depending on who's writing the definition.

I really don't think that people have any idea at all how US expectations of a court differ from that of even the most 1st world of 1st world nations.

A jury? Really? A jury of your *peers*?

Surely you jest.

US soldiers are under the UCMJ. That is the proper jurisdiction. If other countries don't like that they can do thing properly between nations and go to war with us and force their version of justice on our people.

Why should we just give our freedom and our sovereignty away for nothing? Just give it away. Like people haven't died for it. Like sovereignty doesn't matter. Like our government has an obligation to someone other than its own people.

"Trying to find ways in which we can be better neighbors to other countries..."

...does not include giving them authority over our citizens.

It involves being a GOOD NEIGHBOR.

We can do things that we aren't forced to do, you know. Just like you can be a good neighbor without having to have laws explaining every little thing that you need to do, how long your grass is and where you can park your car. You, just like our nation, are capable of being decent without being forced to be decent.

Example... Kyoto... we didn't sign... we didn't put ourselves under the authority of that treaty... but who has actually delivered and performed "good neighborship" with regard to CO2 reductions?

My point is that Obama sees and embraces and values as his direct roots a foreign country and culture that is not American.

Well, strictly speaking, they are his direct roots. That man is his father. And Obama does bear his name. But millions of Americans are born to foreign parents and retain close links to their ancestral homelands. They speak the language, or go back to the old country for holidays, work, etc. Even for military service.

Obama is not like them. Obama, I might even say, is not like us. He doesn't speak the language. He was raised with no connection whatsoever to his father, his father's country, or his father's culture. He necessarily approaches Kenya and his father's tribe as a total stranger, as a foreigner, almost as completely as if he were a White from whitest Iowa. He is not a Kenyan. He is a half-Kenyan by blood and blood alone. Nothing more.

He may feel an abstract emotional tug to the idea of his father's homeland, as Italian-Americans sometimes feel towards Italy, as Irish-Americans sometimes feel towards Ireland, or as Jewish-Americans sometimes feel towards Israel. Or, for that matter, as some African-Americans feel towards the idea of Africa. But, to take an example, Irish-Americans who feel a certain nostalgia for Ireland -- though they may sometimes embarass us by giving money to beasts like the IRA -- don't actually put Irish interests ahead of American interests, or hold values incompatible with American values. When Reagan and Mulroney got up and sang When Irish Eyes are Smiling together (on account of their Irish heritage), they weren't signalling that they believed in the supremacy of the Irish over the Americans (or the Canadians).

It may be true (I think it is), that Obama would be less forceful in his promotion of specifically American interests than McCain would be (or Clinton would be). But this is not because his father was a foreigner, which he was. Nor is it because he has a roseate vision of Kenya as the ancestral homeland of the Obama line, which it is. These facts would not be at all incompatible with an attitude that placed America and her interests first and foremost.

I'm speaking of a set of international standards authored by us and other nations, not just our own, as you describe.

Which nations? Under whose auspices? Have you looked at the membership of the UN Human Rights Council, for example?

Have you paid any attention to the ongoing effort in international oversight organizations to suppress free speech and the free press in the name of "fairness"?

You're calling for a policy of "going along to get along" in order to make other countries happy. Just how far are you willing to lower judicial standards in the hope of making others less envious, less spiteful, and less provincial? How would you feel about the adoption of French system of justice as an international standard? There's a monument to the folly of ideas like this, looming above the East River, and it is physically and metaphorically crumbling under the weight of its corruption, mismanagement, obesience to the rule of dictatorial elites, and persistent violation of the basic principles of human rights grandly declared at it founding.

"Instead I’m going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.”So only BHO can make this country great--at least he's honest--no false modesty.He'd have done much better to say "make this great country better," but apparently, like his wife, he isn't really proud of this country, yet.

OhmaGawd!! Flag pins! Flag pins!! he hates America because he refuses to wear the right jewelry!!!

I think the actual objection here is not that he doesn't wear the pin, but that he went and sneered at people who do, calling flag-pin wearing a "substitute for true patriotism." Now people are just getting their own back.

Any jackass that can't be bothered to put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem or to recite the pledge, or that sneers at those who do wear a flag pin as faek patriots isn't fit to be President of me.

Woodrow Wilson did not wear a lapel flag pin. In fact he thought that most of America was much too jingoistic and favored a more internationalist approach. He famously attempted to start the League of Nations which would lead to a world government that would settle differences through negotiations and goodwill amongst the nations of the world. He felt if he could only talk with the Kaiser and the Bolsheviks he could make them see reason. His wife second wife Edith was very influential in his governing and when he attempted to surrender America’s sovereignty to a foreign governing body, she stated that she had never been proud of her country until that moment. Unfortunately for his plans, President Wilson fell ill and his strong willed domineering wife ended up running the country for the last year of his term. Fortunately for America, Wilson turned out not to be an internationalist, but rather an ineffectualist.

But if someone asked me why I don't wear a flag pin I would simply explain that I'm not much into jewelry. I wouldn't make up some story explaining that those who wore pins were fake patriots.

I did get flag sunglasses now, though. No "message" intended. I just think they're fun.

Other than that I don't have any flag clothing. But I would never dis those ladies who dress all up in the red, white and blue for picnics... they probably have Halloween outfits and Santa Claus earrings, too. As a mode of self-expression I'm almost jealous because they always seem so happy and involved in the symbolism and change of seasons while I trudge along day after unchanging day.

Assuming that you are intelligent from all of your credentials, and assuming that you have read and heard everything that Obama has said, assuming that you have seen the list of people that Obama associates with, are you sure that you are not suffering from the Prince Charming syndrome and it clouds your thought processes?

but I think that a willingness to submit ourselves to a set of standards we would expect other nations to also abide by is one that my "average American" might not find so noxious.

Nope. The "average American" clings to some frivolous ideal called Equal Protection Under The Law. All you have to do is study the way the UN has treated Israel to realize what bunk these multilateral institutions are.

I think that a willingness to submit ourselves to a set of standards we would expect other nations to also abide by is one that my "average American" might not find so noxious.

This "average American" would. There's no way we can abide by any sort of "international standard" as long as there are nations that don't have democratically-elected governments. Dictators are known for lying to the people, so why should we trust them to expect them to abide by any standards other than the ones that benefit them?

If I were in charge, I'd call for a total revamp of the United Nations, with one hard-and-fast rule: No dictators. I'm not saying that a nation can't govern itself in that manner, but, by doing so, they forfeit their membership in the civilized world. No U.N. aid, peacekeepers, etc.; they're on their own, or they could align with other dictatorships if they saw fit. But I believe that, in the end, the good guys (democracies) would win out.

It's simply unthinkable that, in this day and age, a nation could place sole power in one man* and expect to be a contributing member of polite society.

*I'm not being sexist here; has there ever been a woman dictator? I'm not recalling one at the moment, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Catherine's m-i-l(?), the Empress ElizabethMaria Theresa of Austria, though her husband and then son were the Holy Roman EmperorsMary & Elizabeth Tudor, more or lessCatherine de Medici of France while her 3 sons were minors